Three_Oh_Eight

Going against the tide here, in the larger (2,000+) QB I've taken to buying formations, meaning infantry battalions/companies and tank platoons, as well as guns in groups of battery strength, in trying to increase the 'realism' feel. Of course, I fill in the blanks with individuals - tank hunter teams, trucks/prime movers for the guns/"motorized" elements, and the odd MG to use up those last few points. But overall I tend to agree with Oddball's point that it feels weird to buy the single stuff.

Just lending my support to the motion.

Most interesting to me is the reference to research beginning in the early 30s, and the military turning it down in the late 30s! I mean, of course, what advantage would being able to see in the dark give in battle? Maybe it’s the arrogance of hindsight, maybe it’s being a programmer for so many years, or maybe it’s a cultural difference, but I could never understand the conservatism of the military mind. At the most basic level ‘New Gadgets = Cool Stuff’ - who would turn down a new gadget without at least trying it out? Much less a new gadget that gives a real world advantage... like, say, being able to see in the dark.

From the latest Shotgun News, July 20, 2003, p 4: “Like many instruments designed to wage war, the Edenic home of night vision weapon’s sights is to be found in Germany. One of Hitler’s “super weapons,” infrared night vision devices were deployed both on Panther tanks and as driving equipment on trucks. Of interest to us here is a request made in October of 1944 for the development of a small infrared telescopic sight for use on the new 7.92x33mm Kurz Sturmgewehr 44. Such a device was desired to help protect armored units against nighttime attack by infantry tank-killer parties. Within five months a working model, the Zielgerat 1229, was developed and successfully passed testing. Aptly code named the Vampir, it allowed the gunner to detect and engage targets in total darkness by means of electronic detection of invisible infrared radiation. With the fielding of Vampir units by the Panzergrenadiers, a new chapter of technology, and warfare, was begun.” Anyone know anything of this? The article isn’t footnoted, so I don’t know the source. Any credibility to it, or is it another Super Weapon of the Third Reich fantasy? ------------------ (After a bit of looking on the www…) ------------------ Ahhh, the web. Ya gotta love it. From Night Fighting Panthers: “Starting in September 1944, a limited number of Panthers were to be outfitted with an infrared searchlight and scope mounted on the commander's cupola. The 200 watt screened light, in combination with the infrared receiver/gun sight, had a range of up to 600 meters in clear weather at night. A steel band connected the infrared sight to an internal control for gun elevation.” The site above looks great; lots more text than my little snippet, footnoted (mostly German language sources by the look of it), with some cool pics. So, this original quest for info has turned into a post of info. Enjoy. Any chance we’ll see infrared modelled in the next CM patch/release?

I played CMBO for the first time ever earlier this week and agree - CMBB is the superior game. CMBO does have my blessing, though, because it is directly responsible for increasing the wargaming community by one. One real newcomer - not an old grog that moved to CM from board games, or other PC games, but an honest to gawd case of new blood into the hobby - my brother. I've been a gamer my whole life. My younger brother never had any interest, though a history buff I could never coax him into any kind of game. But now that we're both in our 40s, and after, literally, months of psychological warfare**, in late June he ordered... CMBO! But after just a couple of days with it he was stoked! Hour long phone calls ensued, with him relating stories of exploding Tigers and blazing Shermans. Wild charges and jammed machine guns. All the stuff that tac WWII wargames are made of. And, having ordered the bundle myself but never installed CMBO, I was forced to install it and introduce him to the joy of TCP/IP play. Anyway, I’ve assured him that since he thinks CMBO is so cool, CMBB will put him ballistic, and I believe he ordered it just a couple of days ago. Whoever keeps score, add another gamer/addict to the population! ================================================= ** Sample of the emails from me to him. Feb - 2003 SUBJ: Check it out Hi, {snip} I’ve been playing a new game for a while now, and some of the folks who talk about it online are pretty knowledgeable. For some decent WWII history talk, especially tactical stuff, check out the forums at: http://www.battlefront.com/ I'm Three-Oh-Eight on the discussion boards, though I've not posted more than a handful of posts. Eric ------------------------------------------------ March - 2003 SUBJ: Hey bro Hey, You've got to check out the game itself - Combat Mission: Barbarossa to Berlin. I'm not kidding, it's such a cool game that even *you* would get into it. Eric ------------------------------------------------- March - 2003 SUBJ: In case you've been too lazy to look into it... http://www.gamespy.com/reviews/november02/combatmissionbbpc/ http://pc.ign.com/articles/377/377755p1.html http://www.ugo.com/channels/games/features/combatmission/ http://firingsquad.gamers.com/games/cmbbreview/ http://www.pcgameworld.com/review.php/id/346/Combat_Mission:_Barbarossa_to_B erlin/ http://www.strategyinformer.com/reviews/cmbb-review.shtml http://www.planetsilicon.co.uk/review/files/review-276.asp Yes, I'm selfish. This game is so cool, and playing against a human is so fun (I just finished my first PBEM game - got beat, but not by much), that I want to get you sucked into it. PBEM (Play By EMail), is as easy as falling off a log. There are zero bugs - I've literally never had the game crash or freeze. It's not a race against time - you can take 10 seconds or 10 hours to complete a turn. A game can be as small as a couple tanks dueling or a platoon trying to take a single building or as large as a regimental attack with Corps artillery and air support. Overall, it's the best game I've played in ages. So look at it, buy it, and let's play! Eric ------------------------------------------------ April – 2003 SUBJ: Well? Have you ordered it yet? Don't bother looking for it from other sources - it's only distributed in America by Battlefront.com. Order online, it'll be to you in days. Look. Read. Get psyched. Buy. ------------------------------------------------ May – 2003 SUBJ: Meeting in Ohio Hey, {snip - non-CM related stuff} Eric PS. Did you ever get off your ass and check out Combat Mission? Didn't think so. Wanker. [ July 20, 2003, 12:59 AM: Message edited by: Three_Oh_Eight ]

Welcome, CD. What they said. Since you're a wargamer I can join the chorus and assure you that it'll be money well spent. As well, I have to say that the community, both fan and the company, are exceptional. I have limited experience with 'puter games, so I could be misguided, but the fan interaction, company support, and community support (scenarios, tourneys, etc), seem of a much higher order than the typical 'scene' around a game. Must be that they're (hell, *we're*... I've been around a few months now), just all so much more mature than the average game geek.

Ligur, Well done. Excellent presentation. Thanks!

Great site. I'm envious, having a tiny collection of Soviet WWII awards myself. Nothing like this though! An excellent site for info is here. Some sale sites, fun to look through are here, here, and here.

Whine alert. Here’s the scene: QB set in 6/42, daytime, good weather. He’s got a KV1 hidden behind a crest, I’ve got two Stugs on my side of the hill. Game’s coming to an end, I control the flag on my side of the rise, so figuring he’s going to do a last turn charge to contest the flag I’m content to wait and take my shots as he comes. Not satisfied with leaving well enough alone, however, I train my 150 Inf Gun (502m away on another rise, and, significantly, behind my Stugs), on the crest and lob some HE. Who know, may get lucky and button him up. Whatever. What can it hurt? Wellllll. The first, that’s the FIRST, shot lands 93m short (and about 10m off the direct line of fire), right beside one of my Stugs, and knocks the damn thing out! Not shocked. Not immobilised. Knocked out!!! :mad: Yes, I’m a fool. Yes, I had (and have) no idea about the chances of short rounds, area fire radius, etc. No, I won’t lob HE over my guys anymore if they’re within 100m (at least!) of the aim point. Lesson learned and all that. Just had to come here and whine!

ROAR is here. Check it out, it's quite impressive. Such an undertaking would be awesome for CM. Perhaps someone from BF/BTS could take a look at it.

Thanks, all, for the replies. Just as IRL, decisions, decisions...

Scoring question here, in the context of the tournament. If an attacker gets stomped (minimal casualties inflicted, no Flags taken), is there any advantage to preserving his force? Ie, in this situation, does an attacker who takes 25% losses score better than one who takes 90% casualties?

In CMBB (and CMBO for that matter), does "bogging" include throwing a track and other mechanical malfunctions that can stop/immobilize a vehicle?

Woohoo! First off, the 'low res grass' didn't work; game wouldn't start. So... using the backup I replaced the .bmp files, made sure it worked then, and did the download of the 'high res grass'. It's down, and it's great! *Really* helps with recognizing height and slope changes. Can't recommend it enough; well worth the wait for the 10meg download. Snow and Deep Snow are on there way to my PC as I type. Thanks Mr Wackey, and *all* modders out there!

Much as I'm liking the new game (new to me!), I suspect it's not realistic. Why? Optics and bunker design. To trace rounds into a small opening with WWII optics doesn't seem realistic, obscured as vision would be by the crap in the air of a battlefield. If nothing else the stuff kicked up by impacting rounds on the bunker itself would do a fine job. So it's a case of spray and pray. Inefficient and more importantly usually ineffective at actually hitting what one is aiming at. Second, aren’t the openings into a bunker designed to take fire by having sloped sides? Meaning that if a round does manage to make it into the opening it must travel straight in to enter; if it hits a sloped side of the opening then the richocette won’t make it in, being deflected to the other side (L/R, Top/Bottom) of the opening instead of into the interior. It’s how I’d design one. Lastly, would a non-explosive round that did make it in bounce around inside? Seems easy enough to make the interior non deflecting (wood panel, ‘softer’ concrete, whatever) so that the bullet wouldn’t play jumping bean inside. Again, it’s how I’d design it. Of course, a 20mm round (not to mention a ‘small’ 30mm or 45mm round) isn’t a little deal, and perhaps the above would simply be defeated by the size/power of such. Dunno.

Nice work. Positively inspirational. Thanks for the work.

Wolfe, Great work. Thanks!

Ahhh. Thanks. That would make the mechanics (the code) straight forward, so it makes sense.

Nope. Even being merely weeks old, however, I can see their virtue. With QB so easy, and seeming to be a 'standard', some well thought out criteria for picking forces *would* be a boon. The best criteria would be those that created the largest pool of viable forces for any given battle, IMO. Would take knowledge of exactly how each unit (especially armor and gun) interact, what kills what none, some, all the time, etc. Of course, being a lazy sod, I'm not doing it.

Hear, hear. It's the rare QB where the AI is a real challenge anymore. Oh well.

OK, I'm an ASLer. +1, +2... I get what they signify. But what do they do, *really*, in the game? How much 'better' at taking fire is someone in Command where the HQ has a +1 Morale than when it doesn't? A +2? Does anyone know the in game mechanics, what 'percent better' someone is? And most especially, in combat, what *exactly* does a + do for the firer? Better chance to hit? More damage? Faster rate of fire? And if so, how much better?

While the concept is appealing (as a user of Armored Assault movement from ASL), I wonder if it's actually applicable. Just how much cover does walking/running/slinking behind a moving AFV afford 12 guys? Seems to me it would become a jostle fest... "no let ME get in the middle!" to stay directly behind it. Not to mention the 'magnet effect' of the AFV as every Klaus, Fritz and Sasha loosed a few rounds at it, to no effect but just filling the air around it with whizzing bullets and ricochets. As well, a stationary vehicle would supply some cover, but to actually block LOS? Doesn't seem applicable just because there's not that much space to hide in, especially if you want to fire out yourself. In short I might see some kind of cover offered by a vehicle, but if it was going to actually block LOS I'd need to be convinced that it's realistic.

Except for the dimness of the AI, and consequent burning though ammo without changing position, is this a bug or just a reflection of reality? IRL when HE is used effectively, does it hit the gun/gun carriage itself, or the ground nearby? If it's the latter, then it seems logical that a target emplaced higher and slightly behind a rise would be darn mear impossible to hit; misses would dig up the ground in front (with shrapnel going up and out, but not up, over and down where it could affect the crew), or fly over everything into the distance, either way leaving the gun unaffected by any of the HE goodness. I too have seen and been frustrated by this in CMBB. But I'm wondering if the frustration is with a bug in the firing model or just the dumb AI.

Bravo, WP!